Employers are required to provide a safe workplace. The Occupational Health and Safety Act of Canada has this requirement set out

Duties of employers
25.  (1) An employer shall ensure that,
…
(c) the measures and procedures prescribed are carried out in the workplace;

(2) Without limiting the strict duty imposed by subsection (1), an employer shall,
…
(h) take every precaution reasonable in the circumstances for the protection of a worker…

Ontario Power Generation Inc. violated this requirement, and a worker was injured by burns from an arc flash. The company pleaded guilty and was fined $100,000. The conviction was under OHSA, Section 25(2)(h).

This is the description of what happened from the government website.

“On January 15, 2008, two maintenance workers at the company’s Atikokan operating station were called to examine some malfunctioning equipment. The equipment was locked in a chamber to protect workers from its electrically energized, moving apparatus.  A lockout system required equipment to be electrically de-energized, grounded and locked out before the chamber could open.  An equipment operator used a bypass key to circumvent the lockout system and open a hatch door while the equipment was still energized.  One of the workers shone a flashlight into the open door, causing an arc flash of electricity.  The arc flash burned the worker’s hand, arm and chest.

A Ministry of Labour investigation found that the key used to bypass the lockout system was available to workers.

Ontario Power Generation Inc. pleaded guilty to failing to take the reasonable precaution of preventing ready access to the means of circumventing the lockout system.”

Based on the description, it seems that the company did not enforce a safety rule of not bypassing the lockout without adequate supervision. Perhaps a supervisor standing by would have prevented using the flashlight, and the electrical injury on the job would have been prevented. For more information about employer’s safety duties see construction accident injuries.

Serious electrical injuries were the result when an aluminum ladder contacted electric power lines during a roofing job. If any power lines are near the job, fiberglass ladders should be used. A brief article about the injuries, with a picture showing the power lines near the building, can be seen at WTNH Channel 8 web article.

The second picture in the series shows how the power lines were near the building. According to news articles, OSHA is investigating.

The evening before Thanksgiving, a county worker from the water department in Arlington, Virginia lost his life as he was helping to repair a broken water main. This video has touching comments from his co-workers.

On the job injuries make up many of the electrical accident injury problems. Electrical wires are more dangerous around construction or repair activity. May this departed worker rest in peace.

OSHA has cited a contractor for electrocution and fall hazards at a Westchester County, New York worksite. The information below, about significant construction job hazards, is from an OSHA news release dated November 9, 2009.

The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) has proposed over $50,000 in fines against Metro Steel Fabricators Inc., a Brooklyn steel erection contractor, for alleged willful and serious violations of safety standards at a Tuckahoe, N.Y., jobsite.

OSHA’s inspection found that workers at the 30 Elm St. worksite were exposed to electrocution hazards while working within 10 feet of energized high-voltage power and service lines, while workers who were connecting steel beams without fall protection were exposed to falls of three stories.

“Falls and electrocutions are among the leading causes of death in construction work,” said Diana Cortez, OSHA’s area director in Tarrytown, N.Y. “Electricity can kill or injure instantly, while a momentary slip, trip or loss of balance can lead to a fatal or disabling plunge. There is no good reason for an employer’s failure to provide these basic, commonsense and legally required safeguards at each and every jobsite.”

The inspection also found that Metro Steel Fabricators was erecting steel without first receiving written verification that concrete footings were of sufficient strength to support the loads; a roadway workzone was improperly set up and lacked warning signs to tell motorists of a flagger and a crane in the roadway; and additional fall hazards stemmed from lack of perimeter safety cables and use of an incomplete stairway for access.

OSHA has issued Metro Steel Fabricators one willful citation, with a proposed fine of $35,000, for the electrocution hazard and seven serious citations, with $15,600 in fines, for the remaining items. OSHA defines a willful violation as one committed with plain indifference to or intentional disregard of employee safety and health. Serious citations are issued when death or serious physical harm is likely to result from hazards about which the employer knew or should have known.

“One means of preventing hazardous conditions is to establish an effective safety and health management system through which employers and employees work together to proactively evaluate, identify and eliminate hazards,” said Robert Kulick, OSHA’s regional administrator in New York.

Metro Steel Fabricators has 15 business days from receipt of its citations and proposed penalties to comply, meet with OSHA or contest the findings before the independent Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission. The inspection was conducted by OSHA’s Tarrytown Area Office; telephone 914-524-7510.

Under the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970, OSHA’s role is to promote safe and healthful working conditions for America’s men and women by setting and enforcing standards, and providing training, outreach and education. For more information, visit http://www.osha.gov. For information about how on the job injuries may result in a claim in addition to the workers compensation claim, you may want to visit this article about the Employer Liability Law.

When trees grow up near electrical power lines, injury or death can result. Many electrical injury cases happen because trees were allowed to grow too close to power lines. An issue in such a case is whether the electric power utility complied with the safety rules. Each state has safety rules about keeping the trees cut away from the high voltage lines.

Recently, John Sevier, a tree expert and Certified Arborist in California, graciously provided this site with a citation to the minimum distance rules in California. Those California rules provided by Mr. Sevier are cited in the tree growth and electric power lines page. Mr. Sevier has testified in court and in the legislative process about tree safety issues. His information is appreciated.

In an electrical injury case involving the specific tree clearance standard of care, the attorney will usually retain an expert. The expert will advise the attorney about which standards the state officials would expect the power company to have followed, how the state officials interpret their policies (the states vary on how strict they are) and whether the documents show that the power company was in compliance with the standards.

Trees left to grow near high voltage power lines create electrocution danger for the public. Tree branches can grow and hide power lines. The trap set by this situation can maim or kill workers who are painting nearby buildings, or innocent children who are playing by climbing a tree.

The safety rules of the utility regulators require the electric power company to keep the trees cut back from the power lines.

Each state will have its safety rules to prevent electrical injuries. But sometimes the power company may not comply with the safety standards. For example, this staff report comments about inadequate tree clearance to electric lines. In the report, the staff asked the commission to authorize issuance of a citation to the power company, and thereby commence the hearing process.

If the power company does not follow the safety rules, and electrical injury or death is the result, then a personal injury attorney should present the specific safety standard, and the resulting harm, in the trial.

Oregon tree clearance from power lines

The Oregon safety rules give the specific distance from power lines to tree branches and other vegetation:

Oregon Administrative Rules 860-024-0016
“Minimum Vegetation Clearance Requirements
(2) … Each operator of electric supply facilities must have a vegetation management program and keep appropriate records to ensure that timely trimming is accomplished to keep the designated minimum clearances. …
…
(5) Under reasonably anticipated operational conditions, an operator of electric supply facilities must maintain the following minimum clearances of vegetation from conductors:
(a) Ten feet for conductors energized above 200,000 volts.
(b) Seven and one-half feet for conductors energized at 50,001 through 200,000 volts.
(c) Five feet for conductors energized at 600 through 50,000 volts.
(A) Clearances may be reduced to three feet if the vegetation is not readily climbable.
(B) Intrusion of limited small branches and new tree growth into this minimum clearance area is acceptable provided the vegetation does not come closer than six inches to the conductor.
…
(7) In determining the extent of trimming … the operator of electric supply facilities must consider at minimum the following factors for each conductor:
(a) Voltage;
(b) Location;
…
(e) Growth habit, strength, and health of vegetation growing adjacent to the conductor …”

California tree clearance from power lines

California has two minimum distance laws.

General Order 95, rule 35, has a 18” minimum distance that electric power utilities must maintain at all times.

Public Resources code 4293, requires 4 feet of clearance, in State Regulated Areas or wild lands.

The California requirements were provided by John Sevier, Certified Arborist WE1415A. Mr. Sevier has testified as a tree accident expert in the legislative process for General Order 95, rule 35, and in court cases about power line contact and trees, for example Pickrell v. Alabama Power and Chamu v. San Diego Gas and Electric.

Free to Accident Victims and Members of Their Family

If you (or a member of your family) were injured in an accident, you are invited to send for this booklet.

Booklet about Mistakes to Avoid

• How accident claims are handled
• How an attorney determines if you have a good case
• Mistakes to avoid
• How to choose an attorney (see page 39)
• How your attorney decides what amount to ask for
• Steps in settlement negotiation
• Steps in the trial, if you do not settle

and many more topics. Just fill out the form below with your name and mailing address, and the booklet will be mailed to you.

(If you are neither an accident victim nor a family member of an accident victim, call the office and speak to Kelsey to arrange to buy a copy. Price $20.00)

We recommend that you fill in the form as soon as you can. Then you can get the information you want to help you handle a very unfamiliar and stressful situation.

Recent North Carolina case: Kenemore v EnergyUnited.

North Carolina lawyers recently filed this lawsuit. As set out in the Complaint, a pine tree in a residential back yard grew over the years up and around an electric power line. A six year old neighbor boy from next door was visiting with his mother. He and the six year old girl who lives in the house went outside to play in the yard, and the boy climbed the tree. The little girl playing with him came into the house and told the boy’s mother that the boy was pretending to be asleep up in the tree.

The mother went out and called up to her son, who did not move, so she climbed the tree to his limp body, screaming his name. An ambulance took her son to the hospital, but he was dead from electrocution.

There was a 7,200 volt uninsulated electric power line running through the tree or near enough to reach. The 6 year old boy had no idea of the danger.

Complaint as filed, page 1

As readers of this website know, there are electrical safety standards to protect people from the danger of high voltage electric power lines. The National Electrical Safety Code requires the electric power utility companies to keep tree branches cut back from their power lines, to prevent just this sort of accident. It appears from the Complaint that a violation of the National Electrical Safety Code caused the death of an innocent victim.

For a copy of the Complaint as filed in the Court, in Adobe pdf format, click here. But be warned, reading the Complaint will bring tears to your eyes.

My sympathy to the family and friends and neighbors of the boy who was killed.

Update: This case was settled, by the power company making a substantial payment.

For more information about safety standards of keeping trees cut back from power lines, visit the page on trees near power lines.

An unfortunate electrician was on the job pulling cable in a false ceiling, when he died from electrical shock because he touched a cable. The cable had been marked “not in use” but it was in fact connected.

A contractor and three of its employees are facing charges:

“The charges include failing to provide a safe system of working, training, supervision, risk assessment and resources; failing to test circuits and wires into a distribution board before they were made live; and failing to ensure the board was not live while employees worked on circuits connected to it.”

The defendants deny the charges. The trial is expected to last 3 weeks. The BBC news story is available here.

In a recent article, surgeons from England reported on an electric shock that resulted, 18 months later, in blood vessel problems, causing death of the leg bone at the hip joint. The patient was apparently susceptible because of a genetic predisposition.

The patient had stepped on a 500 volt exposed conductor, and his footwear was wet. His muscles contracted but after about 30 seconds he was able to pull himself free.

The surgeons believe that his genetic weakness would probably have not caused the blood vessel problem and resulting leg bone problem, except for the electric shock.

He underwent total hip replacement. The femoral head, that is the top end of the thigh bone, was examined and showed that the blood vessels had died.

“More than five years after the injury the patient’s [total hip replacement] was functioning well and the opposite hip remained clinically and radiologically normal.”

The surgeons commented on the unfortunate typical results as the voltage increases.

“The consequences of electrical injuries to bone may present immediately or after a delay of months to years; in addition, the bony injuries may exist near the entry point, or at a point distant from it.

Most reports to date relate to high-voltage injuries (i.e. currents over 1000 V). These currents take a direct path between entry and exit point. Blood vessels and nerves are severely damaged as are muscle and skin damage, resulting in amputation in over 50% of cases. …

Low-voltage currents (< 1000 V) behave differently and follow the path of least resistance along nerve and blood vessels. Bone itself is a poor conductor and does not carry a large enough current to sustain direct damage.”

The article, by L. Vanderstraeten and M. Binns, is titled Osteonecrosis of the Femoral Head Following an Electrical Injury to the Leg. It was published in the Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, and is set out in a RedOrbit.com blog post.